
Class_i_ 
Book_ 







Q& 



/ 





<d fy£cA^^6^/^£&£. 




WHALLEY AND GOFFE 
IN NEW ENGLAND 

1660-1680 



An Enquiry into the Origin of 

the Angel of Hadley 

Legend 



By GEORGE SHELDON 



REPRINTED FROM THE INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW EDITION OF 

Judd's History of Hadley 

BY 

H. R. Huntting & Co., Springfield, Mass. 
1905 



y 



$> 



•.>. 



X 






^ 






Copyright, 1905 by 

H. R. HUNTTING & CO. 

SPRINGFIELD MASSACHUSETTS 




TOWN HISTORY 
GENEALOGY 
AMERICANA 




WHALLEY AND GOFFE 
IN NEW ENGLAND 

1660-1680 

An Enquiry into the Origin of 

the Angel of Hadley 

Legend 

By GEORGE SHELDON 



There are events in the history of Hadley of which her citizens 
are, and of right ought to be, very proud. They may tell of heroes 
living and dying there, whose dust sanctifies their soil — heroes of 
war, and heroes of peace. The actions of the former are usually 
on a stage where they can be seen and known of all men. For 
the most part these live and act conscious of a watching world, 
and assured that lasting memorials will perpetuate their names 
and deeds. We point to Hadley's farmer-soldier General Hooker 
on Beacon Hill. 

To the heroes of peace all this incentive to action is notably 
wanting. Their noblest deeds are often done in emergencies, 
on a sudden impulse, with no applauding crowd; more often 
without a witness, and with no thought of present reward or 
future fame. The greatest hero of Hadley, however, was of a 
still nobler and finer mold. Actuated by pure motives of humanity, 
sympathy and duty, and the loftiest pitch of patriotism, he patiently 
wrought in darkness and in silence. Through the anxious days and 
lingering nights of more than ten years, he bravely stood within 
a hand's breadth of the gates of ignominious death. He never 
faltered for a single hour, nor ever sought to shift upon another 
the burden and responsibility. Month after month, summer and 
winter, year after year, zealously watching and guarding his 
trust, John Russell was virtually a prisoner within his own 
hamlet. Under his very rooftree he was secreting Edward 
Whalley and William Goffe, two of the patriot judges who con- 



VI INTRODUCTION 

demried to the scaffold that misguided and perfidious represen- 
tative of the "divine right of kings," Charles I., of England. 
These two men were now proscribed; a price was set upon their 
heads, and a swift retribution awaited any who might relieve or 
conceal them. Any neglect of precaution, any unforeseen mishap 
to the premises, any single case of misplaced confidence, and both 
he and his guests were surely doomed to nameless torture and 
death. Of necessity there must have been those about him in 
the secret, but none failed him, although each knew that a single 
whispered word would bring a rich reward. All honor to these 
faithful souls. 

Whalley and Goffe were known to be in Boston in 1660, and 
also in New Haven in 1661; and zealous minions of Charles II. 
were for twenty years ransacking every corner of the Colonies 
with the ardor and persistence of bloodhounds; their very house 
of refuge was searched. Over these two men, themselves of 
heroic proportion, lovers of liberty, patriots of the highest type, 
Mr. Russell was in truth the real "Guardian Angel of Hadley." 

In 1672 Mr. Russell was appointed to a place of trust and honor, 
which would have taken him to Boston free of expense twice each 
year. This very desirable service he declined by letter, saying 
guardedly, that he must do so on account of "the special worke 
where with I stand charged." Seldom or never in all the years in 
which he was guarding that trust, could the steadfast pastor get a 
release from the stated Sunday and Fast Day service by an ex- 
change of pulpits; not once the refreshment and inspiration which 
the country minister was wont to get in the "Annual Conven- 
tion" at Boston. 

In 1674 Goffe writes to his wife that her father, General Whal- 
ley, was fast nearing his end; but no one knows when the day of 
rest came. All knowledge of the time or place of Goffe's departure 
has also passed with him behind the veil. In 1685, however, we 
find the faithful watchman breathing the free air of Boston. 
Probably his "special worke" came to an end finally with a 
second burial in his cellar. Mr. Russell died in 1692. Hadley 
has indeed reason to be proud of such sublime heroism as his, and 
it is passing strange that her citizens have so long delayed placing 
an indestructible memorial to mark the spot where, even in the 
shadow of the grave, loom up the truly grand proportions of John 
Russell. Here shone forth his intense love of liberty. Here he 
stood ready to sacrifice his life, in showing honor for the daring 
deeds of these two apostles of civil freedom, whom he was shield- 
ing from a horrible death. Here he emphasized his belief, that 



INTRODUCTION VII 

"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.'' Evidence is not 
wanting, that the time is now ripe for Hadley to honor itself by 
doing honor to her most noble nobleman, brave John Russell; 
and we may hope and expect with confidence, that this long- 
delayed duty will soon be an actual achievement. His descendants 
may be scattered far and wide; but let Hadley see to it that his 
fame with her shall ever abide. 

The story of the town has been told with rare interest in Judd's 
History of Hadley. This book has been long out of print. More 
than thirty years ago, I bought the only copy I could find on sale 
in Boston. As it is indispensible to any well-equipped library of 
Americana, public or private, and has become so scarce that its 
price has reached a prohibitory figure to most students, there can 
be no question about the necessity of a new edition. Judd's 
History has been known as a standard work ever since it was 
issued. It not only covers Hadley, but the territory for a score 
of miles up and down the valley of the Connecticut. In it the 
searcher after knowledge of the manners and customs of the early 
days will find a full field from which to garner colonial, ecclesias- 
tical, scholastic, civic, industrial, mercantile, legal and legendary 
lore. The very opening chapter contains a clue to the obscure, 
but interminable church quarrels so common and persistent 
among our Puritan and Pilgrim fathers and mothers. The causes, 
when we can unlock their confusing mysteries, seem to us trivial, 
but examination shows that by these earnest, honest men and 
women, they were considered vital and controlling, as being 
matters of eternal consequence. It was one of these disturb- 
ing events in Connecticut that determined when and by whom 
Hadley should be settled. 

Judd was an enthusiastic student; generally seeking the material 
for his history at first hand — in old parchment-covered record 
books, files of musty time-stained papers, tattered letters, and 
long-forgotten diaries. Those who have seen the mass of his 
accumulated papers are surprised at the extent and diversity of 
his research. Although fate decreed that Mr. Judd should not 
have the final arrangement of his great store of genealogical data, 
this work was successfully accomplished by Hon. Lucius M. 
Boltwood, and is, and always will be, a rich mine for the delver 
after family history in the valley of the Connecticut. 

As before said, Mr. Judd must always be looked up to as a 
sound historical authority of the highest rank. If once in a great 
while he be found tripping, we can but say, that it is the common 
lot of all who depend upon original manuscript. New material 



VIII INTRODUCTION 

of this kind may and often does come to light, for the use and 
edification of the later writer. There was one topic upon which 
the painstaking Judd was led astray; that was in giving undue 
credit to President Ezra Stiles, in his History of the Three 
Judges. Through his faith in the standing of the man, Judd 
accepted as history, without his usual investigation, the Leverett 
Tradition, that on Sept. I, 1675, Hadley was attacked by Indians 
while the inhabitants were assembled in the meetinghouse holding 
a Fast Day service, and that the town was only saved from destruc- 
tion by the sudden appearance of General Goffe, at a critical 
moment. If this story is otherwise read by me, and my version 
be accepted as true, I am here embarrassed by an apparent claim 
to be the better student. I am not, and far be it from me to make 
such a claim, f It may not be improper to say, that in common with' 
all the later historians of New England, I had accepted the ac- 
count of President Stiles as an established fact, and no more 
thought of calling in question the authenticity of the Goffe story, 
than of any accepted fact of history?) I had seen, however, so 
many traditions discredited in my general reading, that I had 
made it my rule to take nothing second hand which could be 
personally investigated, and so when possible, I went to the same 
original sources of information as my author. This I soon found 
necessary to the spirit of independent thought and expression, 
for not seldom, I found myself differing from the author in hand, 
in my interpretation of the same facts. 

It was in accordance with the above rule, that I began mining 
for the foundation of the "Angel of Hadley' story. To my sur- 
prise, I soon discovered that the corner stone, instead of being laid 
on bed rock or solid masonry, rested on nothing better than 
elusive quicksand. Had Mr. Judd entertained the faintest sus- 
picion about the main fact of the story, I make no doubt he would 
have investigated the matter, and would have reached the same 
conclusion which was fairly forced upon me. With all his general 
faith in Stiles, Judd was compelled to question some of his posi- 
tions on this subject, occasionally disputing him point blank; 
and he shows that some of the traditions upon which Stiles built, 
were "certainly false." Many other items are treated with 
small respect, "Some of which must be rejected," he says. Mr. 
Judd would doubtless be the last man to regret that the romantic, 
but baseless episode of the Angel of Rescue, so cherished by the 
sentimental, should be eliminated from the annals of the town, 
when its most potent factor is proved to be but the child of an 
indiscriminating credulity. 



INTRODUCTION IX 

It is expected by the publishers of the new edition of Judd's 
History that the Introduction shall contain a concise review of 
the evidence upon which rests the story of the Angel of Hadley, 
as given by Stiles and accepted in the main feature by Judd. 
Necessarily the field to be explored is obscure, the facts to be 
dealt with, fragmentary, widely scattered and individually of 
small account; but all these facts focused upon the objective point, 
will, it is hoped, give a final quietus to the angel fabrication being 
accepted as history. As material for romantic fiction, the myth 
will live for ages. 

General Edward Whalley and General William GofFe were 
members of the "High Court of Justice," which was the forlorn 
hope of civil and religious liberty for the English race, and which 
with one desperate blow so shattered the battlements of Preroga- 
tive, that its walls never have been and never can be fully built 
up again. With the restoration of Charles II., these two men fled 
to New England. When they left London, the King had not been 
proclaimed, but the news reached them while yet in the English 
Channel. The good ship of Captain Pierce, which brought them 
over, "came to anchor between Boston and Charlestown," July 
27, 1660. W T halley had assumed the name of Richardson, and 
GofFe the name of Shepardson. They at once took up their 
residence at Cambridge. The quotations which follow are from 
the diary of General GofFe. 

"July 29th, Lord's Day, heard Mr. Mitchell preach." They 
were well received here by men who knew their real character. 
Mitchell was the minister of Cambridge. "Aug. 9th, Went to 
Boston Lecture, heard Norton, Scotch ship brought threatned 
recognition by one who came in it. At night Maj. [Daniel] 
Gookin showed us a printed paper y l was brought by the Scotch 
Ship wherin the Lds doe order 66 members of the High Court of 
Justice to be secured with y r Estate." 

While at Cambridge they also attended an Indian Lecture, 
probably by the apostle Eliot, and GofFe makes note of the dis- 
cussion which followed and the searching questions put by the 
natives. After Aug. 9th, the Judges made no pretence of conceal- 
ment. 

"Aug. 16th, Sup'd with Mr. Chauncey [President of Harvard 
College] he was persuaded y e Ld had brought us to this country 
for good both to them and ourselves." 

"Aug. 23d, visited Elder Frost," and on the 26th they were 
visited by Mr. Mitchell. By the above may be seen their status 
in Boston. So the Judges waited coming events. Would Charles 



X INTRODUCTION 

be sustained r They had not long to wait. November 30th, a ship 
brought news that the King was firmly established on the throne, 
and furthermore, that complaints were abroad about the way the 
Judges had been received in the Colony. Action here became 
necessary, and on December 19th an "Address to the King "was 
sent over by the General Court. A gracious reply was returned by 
Charles. Before this had been received, however, orders had 
arrived for the apprehension of Whalley and Goffe. February 
22d the Court of Assistants met to consider the matter. The 
members did not agree upon any action, and nothing followed; 
but all saw that a crisis was near, and means were found to send 
the Judges away from the Bay. They were guided by an Indian 
as far as Springfield, and thence by Simon Lobdel through 
Hartford, reaching New Haven March 7, 1661. A few days 
after they left Cambridge, a "Hue-and-Cry" was received from 
England, and March 8th, a warrant for their arrest was sent to 
Springfield, on their trail. But the birds had flown, as was 
doubtless expected. 

The pretended efforts of Governor Endicott did not blind 
observers in England. One Mr. Lang writes Rev. John Daven- 
port at New Haven, Oct. 28, 1661, "The Bay stirring soe much 
for the Apprehending of W: & G: signifie at present heere but 
little, because they were so long with them & then did nothing." 
Governor Endicott did not succeed altogether in saving his credit, 
but the Judges had fled beyond his jurisdiction and he was saved 
further embarrassment. They were well received as befitting 
their rank, by the leading men of Hartford and New Haven. 
They were probably sheltered under the roof of Rev. Mr. Daven- 
port at New Haven, but not for long. 

Forced by royal mandate, on the 7th of May, 1 661, Governor 
Endicott sent Thomas Kellond, captain of an English ship, and 
Thomas Kirk, a young Boston merchant, two zealous royalists, 
to search for the Judges, as far south as New York. On their 
return May 29th, they made a detailed Report to Governor 
Endicott. From this Report we learn that they reached Guilford, 
Conn., May nth, 1661, and had a conference with William 
Lette, acting governor. On the 12th or 13th, they arrived at 
New Haven. There some time was spent in ineffectual efforts to 
induce the magistrates to give them authority to search for the 
Judges. The agents were put off chiefly by pretended difficulties 
in matters of authority. They say, "And soe findeing them 
obstinate and pertenaceous in their contempt of his Majestie, 
we came away the next day in prosecution after them, according 



INTRODUCTION XI 

to instructions, to the Governour of Manadas," by whom they 
received civil treatment and fair promises; after which "Wee 
made our returne by sea to give your honor an accompt." 

To this relation they made oath. News of the coming of Kel- 
lond and Kirk was received at New Haven by Mr. Davenport 
in advance of their arrival, and the Judges were spirited away 
to a safe retreat. Later a search of New Haven was made by 
the authorities, which ended as intended. The Judges remained 
in hiding in and about New Haven and Guilford until 1664, 
when, learning that Commissioners from England had arrived 
in Boston with special orders to search for Whalley and Goffe, it 
was thought they were no longer safe in Connecticut; and on the 
13th day of October, 1664, they began their long night journey 
through the woods to the house of Rev. John Russell, in Hadley. 
That little plantation was only five years old, but its sturdy stock, 
the pick of three towns, had already taken firm root in the virgin 
soil. The minister, who had led his flock out of a theological 
snarl in Connecticut, was leader still. Peter Tilton, the magis- 
trate, stood next in position. All were men of strong parts and 
sterling principles; men to be relied upon should the worst befall. 
In this little town, deep in the wilderness, the worn and hunted 
men found a sure refuge. One of them for a certainty here finished 
his checkered career, and here I believe his ashes still rest in an 
undiscovered grave. As to the younger, General GofFe, doubts 
may properly be raised. 

From Hadley the exiles corresponded by letter with their 
friends in England and in New England, under assumed names. 

The question of the Indian attack on Hadley Sept. I, 1675, 
and the appearance of the "Good Angel" GofFe to the rescue, 
will be considered in a general review of the evidence in the case. 
The wide dissemination of this story is chiefly due to Ezra Stiles, 
President of Yale College, in his History of the Three Judges 
published in 1794. For this work, Doctor Stiles attempted to 
make an exhaustive search in all directions for material, and he 
shows a commendable zeal and industry in hunting for recorded 
facts and traditions. Unfortunately, however, there appears to 
be in him a lack of the judicial quality. He delights to eat and 
drink of traditions, but he fails in their digestion. He plainly 
exhibits a certain twist in his make-up, which inclines him to give 
more weight to a faint family tradition, than to verified contem- 
poraneous facts. In justification of this criticism, I will cite a 
single example. I have spoken of the mission of Kellond and 
Kirk to New Haven, and their sworn return to Governor Endicott. 



XII INTRODUCTION 

This Report is printed in full by Doctor Stiles. The salient facts 
are, that the emissaries spent three days in fruitless efforts to obtain 
a warrant to enable them to search for the Judges. Failing in 
this, on the fourth day, they left Connecticut for New York, 
without making any search; and from New York they say "Wee 
made our returne by sea, to give your honor an accompt." After 
giving this Report, Stiles comments upon it thus: "They arrived 
at New Haven the 13th day; and it should seem that they left 
the town the next day, and this without any search at all; and 
particularly, no mention is made of their interview with Mr. 
Davenport. But the constant tradition in New Haven is, that 
they diligently searched the town, and particularly the house of 
Mr. Davenport, whom they treated with asperity, and repre- 
hension. ... It would seem that they [the Judges] were not in 
town while the pursuivants were here." 

Now, in the face of this Report and his own comments, Stiles 
in the same chapter gives page after page of obscure and con- 
flicting traditions, which he tries to soften and reconcile, to prove 
that Kellond and Kirk did search several houses, and that the 
Judges had several narrow escapes in the process. Further, 
that the pursuers returned home from New York not by sea, 
but through New Haven, where they continued the search; for 
so say some family traditions. Such treatment of evidence 
warrants a very careful scrutiny of other conclusions arrived at 
by Doctor Stiles. The knowledge that Whalley and Goffe were 
concealed at Hadley was " first made known to the world " in 1 764, 
by Governor Thomas Hutchinson in his "History of Massachu- 
setts." In collecting material for this history, Hutchinson visited 
Hadley, and sought to find and garner every scrap of tradition 
concerning the Judges that might have floated down on the years 
of a century which he knew had passed since their lot had been 
cast in that town. His errand appears to have been nearly barren 
of results. Apparently no one there had any knowledge or 
tradition connecting Hadley with the Judges. The result of his 
research so far as it appears, is this: "The tradition at Hadley 
is that two persons unknown were buried in the minister's 
cellar." That and no more. 

In 1793, President Stiles, while hunting material for his history 
of the Judges also spent some time in Hadley. He aroused the 
interest and secured the help of Rev. Samuel Hopkins, who had 
been the minister there since 1754. They made diligent search 
among the older people for any and every possible scrap of tradi- 
tion or legend — "Even fabulous ones," says Doctor Stiles — in 



INTRODUCTION XIII 

any way concerning the astounding revelation of Hutchinson in 
1764. Nothing direct or substantial was discovered. They 
found a few faint and shadowy traditions, varying and contra- 
dicting one another, although all pointed toward the fact of 
strangers, in the long past, being concealed in the houses of Mr. 
Russell and Mr. Tilton; and that "one of them died in the town, 
those who remember which, say Whalley." The results from this 
search are embodied in a letter from Mr. Hopkins to President 
Stiles. 

There is good reason to believe that the names of Russell, 
Tilton, and Whalley were later additions to the traditions. In 
this volume Judd printed all that was obtained by Stiles and 
Hopkins. Here will be found faint echoes of the real state of 
affairs at Hadley which leaked out in hints dropped by some of 
those in the deadly secret, long after all danger had passed. One 
of these traditions which appears the most trivial, is in reality 
the only one bearing internal evidence of being authentic. It 
shows conclusively that as late as 1725-30, while there were 
vague rumors in the air easily referable to the Judges, nothing 
was publicly known about the facts in the case. There were only 
unrelated stories. This one tradition follows. Doctor Stiles states, 
that in May, 1792, he visited at Wethersfield, Conn., Mrs. Porter, 
"a daughter of Mr. Ebenezer Marsh, and born at Hadley, 1715, 
next door to Mr. Tilton's." In reply to his questionings, she 
told him that before she left Hadley, "there were many flying 
stories, but so uncertain that nothing could be depended on." 
She said that "When she was a girl, it was the constant belief 
among the neighbors that an old man, for some reason or other, 
had been buried in the fence between Deacon Eastman's and her 
father's " so that each could " be able to say that he was not buried 
in his lot; but why he should be buried in the lot at all, and not 
in the public burying place, she had never heard any reason or 
tradition. She said the women and girls . . . used to meet at the 
dividing fence, and while chatting and talking together for amuse- 
ment, one and another at times would say, with a sort of skittish 
fear and laughing, 'Who knows but what we are now standing 
on the old man's grave.'" The significance of this extract from 
Stiles, of which Hopkins could learn nothing, will appear when 
we come to consider his declaration that the story of Goffe, the 
angel, was known to everybody about 1690. 

I will now take up the main object of this presentation, and give 
consideration to the letter from Hopkins to which I have alluded. 
It was written to Doctor Stiles March 26, 1793. I shall comment 



XIV INTRODUCTION 

only upon this significant passage which covers the gist of the 
Angel Story.- "Most of whom I have enquired for tradition say, 
that while they [the Judges] were here, the Indians made an 
assault upon the town; that on this occasion a person unknown 
appeared, animating and leading on the inhabitants against the 
enemy and exciting them by his activity and ardours; that when 
the Indians were repulsed, the stranger disappeared — was gone 
— none ever knew where, or who he was. The above is the general 
tradition among us. I shall now notice some things which were 
in the tradition, as given by some differing from the above, or 
adding somewhat to it." Then follow the stories which have 
been characterized as misty, and inconclusive. In none of these, 
it must be noted, is there the slightest reference to the attack on 
Hadley September 1st, which Hopkins says in his letter, "is the 
general tradition among us." Whence comes this "general tra- 
dition"? Not from the stories which he gathered from the old 
families, and quotes. The source is not far to seek. Hutchinson, 
as we have seen, could not find at Hadley the slightest tradition 
or trace of Whalley or GofFe by name. The total result of his 
search was the story that "Two persons unknown, were buried 
in the minister's cellar." That, in 1763, was the sum and sub- 
stance of Hadley tradition. Col. Israel Williams, an intimate 
personal and political friend of Hutchinson, was born and lived 
all his days within cannon shot of the house of Mr. Russell, and 
had known hundreds of people whose fathers or grandfathers 
were contemporary with the events at Hadley in 1675, but he 
could add nothing to this meager information. If no trace of the 
Angel Story was to be found in 1763, how comes it to be so "gene- 
ral" in 1793 ? 

In 1764 Hutchinson published his history. For the first time, 
the generation then on the stage knew that the two Judges had 
ever been given shelter in Hadley. Here then is the base of this 
general tradition of 1793. After this strange revelation by the 
historian, it became the common topic of conversation. The 
matter was, of course, talked over and over by old and young, 
until at length it was incorporated in the town talk, and the people 
gradually assumed that the facts had always been known in the 
community. In truth they had always existed, to those born after 
1763. In view of what is now known, this seems a simple and 
justifiable solution of the "general tradition" of which Hopkins 
writes in 1793. 

.We shall study Hutchinson's History only so far as it relates 
to Whalley and GofFe. When he wrote he had in his possession 



INTRODUCTION XV 

that part of the diary of General Goffe from May 4, 1660, the 
time he left England, until 1667. Up to that date Hutchinson's 
knowledge is absolute and cannot be questioned. After that 
date his narrative is more general although he held other original 
papers. The latter are now accessible and have been freely used 
in preparing this introduction. 

In his book, Hutchinson gives a general account of the arrival 
and reception of Whalley and Goffe at Boston and Cambridge, 
and of their sojourn at New Haven and Hadley. He says, "The 
story of these persons has never yet been published to the world. 
It has never been known in New-England. Their papers, after 
their death, were collected and have remained near an hundred 
years in a library in Boston." In a footnote of several pages 
Hutchinson enlarges; tells more particulars of their hiding and 
adventures at New Haven, until October 13th, 1664, when "they 
removed to Hadley near an hundred miles distant, travelling only 
by night, where Mr. Russell the minister of the place had pre- 
viously agreed to receive them. Here they remained concealed 
fifteen or sixteen years, very few persons in this Colony being 
privy to it." This footnote closes thus; and here is the nut to be 
cracked: "I am loth to omit an anecdote handed down 
through Governor Leveret's family. I find Goffe takes notice 
in his journal of Leveret being at Hadley. The town of Hadley 
was alarmed by the Indians in 1675, in the time of public service, 
and the people were in the utmost confusion. Suddenly, a grave, 
elderly person appeared in the midst of them. In his mein and 
dress he differed from the rest of the people. He not only encour- 
aged them to defend themselves, but put himself at their head, 
rallied, instructed and led them on to encounter the enemy, who 
by this means were repulsed. As suddenly the deliverer of Hadley 
disappeared. The people were left in consternation utterly unable 
to account for the strange phenomenon. It is not probable that 
they were ever able to explain it." 

We note this is not given as history by Hutchinson, but only as an 
"anecdote" and merely in a footnote. The mysterious stranger 
is not mentioned at all in the body of the book where he gives the 
history of Philip's War. Not only this, but he gives good reasons 
why the story could not be true. His notice of the affair described 
in the "anecdote" is this — "September the 1st, Hadley was 
attacked upon a fast day, while the people were at church, which 
broke up the service, and obliged them to spend the day in a very 
different exercise." This much of the "anecdote" was accepted 
by the historian, as there is no other authority for it. Upon this 



XVI INTRODUCTION 

Stiles enlarges, thus: "Though told with some variation in dif- 
ferent parts of New-England, the true story of the Angel is this: 
During their abode in Hadley, the famous . . . Philip's War took 
place . . . and Hadley . . . was then an exposed frontier. That 
pious congregation were observing a Fast at Hadley on the 
occasion of this war: and being at public worship in the meeting- 
house there on a Fast day, September i, 1675, were suddenly 
surrounded and surprised by a body of Indians. . . The people 
immediately took to their arms, but were thrown into great con- 
sternation and confusion. Had Hadley been taken the discovery 
of the Judges had been inevitable. Suddenly, and in the midst 
of the people there appeared a man of a very venerable aspect, and 
different from the inhabitants in his apparel, who took the com- 
mand, arranged and ordered them in the best military manner, 
and under his direction they repelled and routed the Indians, and 
the town was saved. He immediately vanished, and the inhabit- 
ants could not account for the phenomenon, but by considering 
that person as an Angel sent of God on that special occasion for 
their deliverance; and for some time after said and believed 
that they had been delivered and saved by an Angel — nor did 
they know or conceive otherwise till fifteen or twenty years after, 
when it at length became known at Hadley that the two Judges 
had been secreted there; which probably they did not know until 
after Mr. Russell's death in 1692. This story, however, of the 
Angel at Hadley, was before this universally diffused thro' New- 
England by means of the memorable Indian War of 1675. The 
mystery was unriddled after the revolution, when it became not 
so very dangerous to have it known that the Judges had received 
an asylum here and that Goffe was actually in Hadley at that 
time. The Angel was certainly General Goffe, for Whalley was 
superannuated in 1675." 

Here we have the story of the attack September 1st, and the 
full-fledged Angel enlarged from the "anecdote." Stiles has now 
woven it into history. This has been accepted by all historians, 
great and small, and spread broadcast over the civilized world. 
It is confessedly founded upon the anecdote — no other source of 
information is even hinted at. Doctor Stiles gives credit to 
Hutchinson for a new fiact in Philip's War, which had been 
overlooked by all the contemporaneous historians. Hutchinson 
did indeed swallow so much of the myth as covered the attack; 
but he states distinctly, that Goffe could not have appeared in the 
fray, without its leading to his discovery and destruction. This 
was a self-evident conclusion. Stiles cannot be justified in 



INTRODUCTION XVII 

discarding this statement and foisting the Angel story wrongfully 
upon Hutchinson. 

Now a word about the origin of the "Anecdote." It was either 
one stroke of some imaginative genius, or as is more probable, 
the gradual growth of generations in the fireside lore of the Leverett 
family. Its roots were no doubt planted in Mather's story of the 
"Alarm" at Hadley September ist, publishedin 1676. Its branches 
may easily have been scions grafted on the knowledge of the facts 
in the case, handed down in the Leverett family, that the Judges 
were in Hadley on that same day. This is Mather's account of 
what really did happen at Hadley Sept. 1, 1675, as given in his 
history of Philip's War. "One of the Churches in Boston was 
seeking the face of God by fasting and prayer before him. Also 
that very day, the Church in Hadley was before the Lord in the 
same way, but were driven from the holy service they were 
attending by a most sudden and violent alarm, which routed them 
the whole day after." 

There can be no doubt that Mather's story of the "alarm" at 
Hadley was true. The same could have been said of Hatfield and 
Northampton, when the astounding news reached them of the 
attack that day upon Deerfield. No doubt they too "were in the 
utmost confusion," while making preparation for their defence. 
The usual method of Indians in warfare is, to watch chances for a 
surprise; then a swift stroke, and speedy retreat. But at Deer- 
field the first shock was unsuccessful; the Indians lingered, and 
in a measure besieged the garrisons, expecting to lay the whole 
town in ashes; part being busy in plundering and burning, out of 
musket range from the stockades. In the meantime this condi- 
tion had been discovered and reported by scouts from below. It 
was the first attack upon any town in the valley, and what would 
be their fate after Deerfield had been destroyed, was the main 
thought. Of course, the people of Hadley were "in consternation 
by a most sudden and violent alarm, which routed them the whole 
day after," and doubtless a sleepless night followed. We must 
always note that Mather does not give the story of the alarm as 
part of the history of the war. He was dwelling strictly upon the 
dealings of God with the people, and the effect of prayer in turn- 
ing aside His wrath. 

The matter-of-fact Stoddard makes no note of this alarm. 
When sending Mather material for his "History of the War," 
he wrote only of the "Remarkable Passages." This alarm was 
such a trifle among the terrible tragedies of the two weeks covered 
by his letter, as not to be worthy of any note, and it is heard of 



XVIII INTRODUCTION 

only in fhe theological disquisition by Mather — save when it 
serves as a sub-base for the narrative of Stiles. 

Hutchinson says squarely that the knowledge of the Judges' 
concealment at Hadley "had never been known to the world" 
before 1764, just one hundred years after the event. Stiles calmly 
ignores this declaration, and says unreservedly that the story of 
the mysterious stranger of September 1st was known throughout 
the country in 1675-6, and that the stranger was believed to be an 
Angel until after 1688. Hutchinson was a Tory, his house had 
been sacked by a mob, and he had been driven from his native 
land. He died in comparative obscurity in 1780. Stiles was an 
earnest Whig, an ardent lover of civil freedom, a stout opposer 
of the Prerogative. Could he have supposed that the history of 
Hutchinson would also fall into disrepute, and be replaced by 
his own ? He knew full well how marvelous stories were adapted 
to the popular taste. 

We will now take up that part of the "anecdote" accepted by 
Hutchinson, and baldly say that the "Angel Story" could not 
be true for the reason that there was absolutely no attack on 
Hadley by Indians Sept. 1, 1675. The evidence to support this 
declaration is chiefly negative, but it seems to me that it is positive 
in effect. In a history of Philip's War published in December, 
1676, Rev. Increase Mather, after giving an account of the fight 
at Sugar Loaf Aug. 25, 1675, continues: 

"Sept. I, The Indians set upon Deerfield (alias Pacumtuck) 
and killed one man and laid most of the houses in that new hope- 
ful Plantation in ruinous heaps. That which added solemnity 
and awfulness to that desolation, is that it happened on the very 
day when one of the churches in Boston [Mather's own] was 
seeking the face of God by Fasting and Prayer. Also that very 
day the church in Hadley was before the Lord in the same way, 
but were driven from the Holy service they were attending by a 
most sudden and violent alarm, which routed them the whole day 
after, so that we may humbly complain, as sometime the CrfUrch did, 
' How long hast thou smoaked against the Prayers of thy People.' 
Not long after this Capt. Beers with a considerable part of his 
men fell before the enemy. Concerning the state of these parts 
at this time until Sept. 15, I received information from a good 
hand whilst things were fresh in memory, which I shall here 
insert as containing a brief History of the transactions which 
happened within the time mentioned [Sept. 1— 15], these parts 
being the seat of the war. The letter I intend is that which fol- 
loweth." 



INTRODUCTION XIX 

The letter referred to is in this volume. It is from Rev. Solo- 
mon Stoddard, then minister at Northampton, dated Sept. 15, 
1675. It is a long letter, reciting minutely the movements of the 
contending forces in the valley. Stoddard tells of the disarming 
of the near-by Indians, August 24th, the affair at Sugar Loaf, 
August 25th, and says, "We heard no more of the Indians till the 
first of September, when they shot down a garrison soldier at 
Pocumtuck, that was looking after his horse, and ran violently 
up into the town, many people having scarcely time enough to 
get into the garrison: that day they burnt most of their houses and 
barns, the garrisons not being strong enough to sally out upon 
them, but killed two of their men from their forts." He gives 
a full account of the tragic events which accompanied the dis- 
truction of Northfield, September 2-6; the second attack on 
Deerfield September 12th; the relief expedition, September 13th, 
and the arrival of Captain Moseley at Hadley, September 14th. 
Hadley is not named at all September 1st, and who knew theevents 
of that day better than Parson Stoddard ? 

Samuel Mather, nephew of Increase Mather, then minister at 
Deerfield, wrote his uncle the fullest account of the assault 
which has been found. With all this information before him, 
Mather gives not the slightest hint of any trouble at Hadley but 
the "Alarm," which was obviously on hearing the news from 
Deerfield. That was enough; for Deerfield, as I have said, was 
the first town in the valley which was attacked by Indians. 
Mather writes the next year a History of New England. Hubbard 
published his notable History of Philip's War in 1677. Several 
contemporary pamphlets and letters are extant, but not one of 
these affords a scintilla of light on the alleged attack on Hadley. 
We also look in vain in the History of the War by Cotton Mather, 
a few years later. In fact, not a single word can be found on the 
matter before 1764. If the attack September 1st were a verity, 
why this silence ? 

Judd attempts an explanation: it was because the Judges were 
concealed there. He says, "It was necessary at the time and 
long after, to throw a veil over the transactions of that day, which 
has been, and can be, only partially removed." Let us examine 
this explanation — does it explain! How could this silence be 
enforced! The facts must have been known to every person in 
Hadley, inhabitants and soldiers; to all in Hatfield and North- 
ampton. The story must have been repeated to the hundreds 
of soldiers who came to Hadley that week, for there was the 
headquarters of the army and the gathering place of the forces 



XX INTRODUCTION 



from the East and from Connecticut. Silence might perhaps 
have been' imposed upon the magistrates and ministers, but 
what of the miscellaneous multitude ? All must see the utter 
impossibility of keeping their mouths shut, when, in the very 
nature of the case, no reason could be given, without betraying 
the fatal secret. On the contrary, if the people of Hadley believed 
they had been saved from destruction by an angel sent of God, 
why should not this amazing thing be proclaimed from every 
pulpit with joy and thanksgiving, be discussed at every fireside 
in the land, and preached in every camp that they were the chosen 
people of the Lord! This was by far and far the most important 
event in the history of New England; and how soon would the 
news have spread to the uttermost parts of the earth; and how 
would the literature of the times have teemed with the marvelous 
story. How the superstitious savage would have quailed in terror 
at this act of the white man's God! The bloody events of the 
current week show no such effect. If true, why do we not find 
traditions or recorded facts in the families of Barnard, Baldwin, 
Boltwood, Coleman, Dickinson, Hawks, Moody, Porter, Russell, 
Smith, Warner, or Wells, who were on the spot; or in those of 
Allis, Arms, Belden, Cowles, Field, Frary, Gillet, Graves, Hub- 
bard, Hinsdale, Kellogg, Lyman, Munn, Montague, Marsh, 
Morton, Parsons, Pomeroy, Sheldon, Stebbins and scores of 
others in the surrounding towns, descendants of all of which 
families are now living among us? Look at the contrast! The 
knowledge of this wonderful deliverance of beset Hadley, by the 
act of the heroic Goffe, or the direct act of God, lay dormant and 
unknown for ninety years, to creep out at length through a tra- 
ditionary anecdote handed down in a single family in far-off 
Boston, and then only preserved in a marginal footnote to a 
printed page. But Hutchinson, even, who published the tradition, 
did not believe the mysterious appearance part of the story, and 
the part which he did accept quietly slumbered for thirty years 
longer, until it was revived and printed by President Stile's, and 
so scattered broadcast as veritable history. 

It is certainly strange that subsequent writers should have fol- 
lowed Stiles in the main feature of the story. Most of them added 
to or varied it, as their fancy dictated, or their judgment impelled. 
Hoyt can find no warrant for September 1st, and changes the date 
to June 9, 1676. Judd and Huntington find the attack was not on 
the meetinghouse. Holland adds many new features, following 
Hoyt in the date, and brings Major Talcott over from Northamp- 
ton to be at the finish. Palfrey and Robbins add eloquent and 



INTRODUCTION XXI 

picturesque descriptions. Farmer makes quite a different thing 
of it and quotes conversation with Goffe. Drake accepted the 
story with great effort, and can only fix the date " Some time during 
the war." 

There is one trifling but amusing feature which runs through 
all the accounts. We are expected to be impressed by the dra- 
matic exhibit, the venerable aspect of the stranger, his silver 
locks, his ancient garb, his flashing sword. Assuming that his 
wardrobe had not been replenished during his eleven years' stay, 
would it appear noticeably "ancient" in a land where garments 
were habitually handed down from father to son ? The man who 
wears my clothes is not pointed out on the street, although there 
has been no change in the fashion of his " garb " for well-nigh forty 
years. I do not believe the men of Hadley in 1675 were a bit 
more observant. The flowing locks of the old Round Head, and 
the ancient garb have been greatly overworked. I bid them a 
long adieu. 

The supposed grave of Whalley. No one has ever been able to 
fix the exact date of Whalley's death, or the place of his burial. 
He was alive Aug. 5, 1674, but in a fast failing condition. It is 
generally agreed that he died within a few months. Of course, 
he was buried at Hadley. As to the exact place of burial, the tra- 
ditions or stories gathered by Hopkins and Stiles in 1793 at Hadley 
are worthless. There was not one direct tradition to be found. 
"It seems to have been a matter of conjecture among the inhabit- 
ants," half a dozen sites are guessed at. Taking an average, 
Stiles guesses that one of the Judges was buried at Mr. Russell's 
and one at Mr. Tilton's; that both were eventually removed to 
New Haven and laid near the grave of Dixwell, the third of the 
"Three Judges in America." No one is found supporting Stiles 
in this last supposition. Judd says, "It seems to be fabulous. . . 
It is certainly false in regard to Whalley, and is believed to be 
equally unfounded as to Goffe. The necessity of secrecy would 
have prevented the removal as it must be done by oxen and cart." 
Judd thinks Whalley's grave has been found at Mr. Russell's. 
His views are stated in this volume. I will give a brief abstract, 
and my reason for a non-agreement. 

Mr. Russell's house stood on the east side of Main Street, 
fronting south. It was built in 1660 with no cellar. Its flank was 
on Main Street, and in 1662 a kitchen with a cellar was added to 
the rear. In this cellar, if anywhere at Mr. Russell's, Whalley 
was buried. In 1749 the house had passed to Samuel Gaylord. 
His son Chester Gaylord, born in 1782, informed Mr. Judd in 



XXII INTRODUCTION 

1859, that .before he was born his father took down and rebuilt 
the kitchen end, and "the old cellar remained." The main build- 
ing was not changed in any way. Chester said, that when a boy, 
he had often taken up a loose board and gone down to the hiding 
place of the Judges behind the chimney. In 1795, he said the 
front part of the house was replaced by a larger, the extension 
being to the south. The kitchen was left standing. Some of the 
changes involved I do not understand, but I quote from Judd all 
that is essential. "In taking down the middle part of the front 
wall next the Main Street, the workmen discovered about four 
feet below the top of the ground, a place where the earth was 
loose, and a little search disclosed flat stones, a man's bones, and 
bits of wood. Almost all the bones were in pieces, but one thigh 
bone was whole, and there were two sound teeth. A doctor 
examined the thigh bone and said it was the thigh bone of a 
man of large size. This and other bones were laid on a shelf and 
in a short time they all crumbled into small pieces." 

From the condition of these bones, I am convinced that they 
were not the remains of one of the Judges. They were too far 
gone in decay. It is more likely that this was the grave of an 
Indian buried long before Whalley came to Hadley. The grave 
may have been disturbed when the cellar wall of Mr. Russell's 
kitchen was built in 1662; most of the bones may have been 
scattered at that time. Reasons for my doubt are found in my 
own observation, reinforced by established facts. I have dug up 
many skeletons in my own home lot, owned in the family since 
1701, and owned by other white men from 1667. Some of the 
graves contained bones in the last stages of decay. In those of 
more recent burial, the entire skeletons were in perfect condition. 
One of these skulls is now on exhibition at Amherst College, 
another at Worcester, several at Washington, all solid and in 
lasting condition. One was used by Hon. James S. Grinnell for 
an inkstand. Generally full sets of teeth remained, some much 
worn. In one case I found several decayed teeth. There could 
have been no burial here for over 200 years. Whalley had been 
dead only 120 years. 

John Dixwell, another of the Judges, died at New Haven 
March 18, 1689. His remains were exposed Nov. 22, 1849, one 
hundred and sixty years after death. The Dixwell family of Bos- 
ton were placing a monument over the grave in honor of their 
ancestor. The bones of Dixwell were in perfect condition, the 
skull so entirely sound that exact measurements were made for 



INTRODUCTION XXIII 

the purpose of scientific comparison. He had been buried forty 
years longer than Whalley. 

I was informed by Miss Fanny Chesebrough, who had exact 
knowledge, that when the grave of Lady Alice Fenwick at 
Saybrook, Conn., was invaded at the behest of the heartless 
railroad, the skeleton was intact. On reburial it was found that 
nothing but a single finger bone was lacking. Lady Fenwick 
had been buried 250 years, more than twice as long as General 
Whalley. 

Within a few years quite a number of complete Indian skeletons 
were discovered at Hadley. It may not be out of place to notice 
here the growth of a story, which has just come under my eye. 
Speaking of this very grave, the writer says, "The remains of 
Whalley were found in a stone vault, outside the wall of Mr. Rus- 
sell's cellar; it was covered by a single slab of hewn stone." Such 
is apt to be modern history as told in current literature. 

Another reason for discrediting this location of Whalley's 
grave is that the burial must have been made by digging on the 
main street, at the imminent risk of discovery, or by taking down 
part of the cellar wall from the inside, and making an excavation 
some three feet from the surface. In doing this, there would be 
great danger of caving in by wall and earth and consequent dis- 
covery. Then the wall must be relaid, and no old cellar wall can 
be so treated without leaving marks of the process. Again, a 
body laid so near a rough stone wall must in decomposition soon 
betray the secret. If the burial was in the cellar, as it doubtless 
was, the simple and natural thing to do was to dig the grave in 
the bottom of the cellar with no risk of discovery, and where the 
marks of disturbance could easily be concealed. As to the 
necessity of concealing the grave of the Judges, Doctor Stiles 
says, "Such was the vigilance, activity and malice of Randolph 
. . . that both their persons and ashes would not escape his ma- 
licious vengeance if discovered." It was known that the graves 
of their dead compeers in England had been violated in the most 
horrible manner. Stiles says further that so late as 1760 "some 
British officers passing through New Haven, and hearing of Dix- 
well's grave visited it, and declared with rancorous and malicious 
vengeance, that if the British Ministers knew it, they would even 

then cause his body to be dug up and vilified Crown 

officers so late as 1775" treated Dixwell's grave "with marks of 
indignity too indecent to be mentioned." 

The Removal of Goffe to Hartford. As I have said, the time of 
Goffe's death and place of burial are unknown. The general 



XXIV INTRODUCTION 

tenor of tradition at Hadley before treated upon, points to Hadley 
as the place. Whatever value these traditions may have, Judd 
believed the close of his career was in that town. Some of the 
stories there indicate his removal to New Haven, to Virginia, to 
the Narraganset Country, to the West Indies, to Hartford. This 
last tradition I think will be found true. 

Philip's War broke out in the summer of 1675. Hadley was 
made headquarters for the forces sent to the Connecticut Valley, 
and the troops must have been billeted largely upon the inhabit- 
ants. It has always seemed a marvel that Goffe could lie con- 
cealed in that little village during this confused and congested 
condition; and it is easy to believe that he might have been 
spirited away to Hartford. Scattered evidence that this was 
done will be briefly considered. 

While the Judges were in hiding at Hadley, they were in con- 
stant correspondence with friends and relatives in England and 
elsewhere, under assumed names. Rev. Increase Mather acted 
as clearing house in Boston. Many letters are extant which were 
sent through his hands. Goffe passed as Walter Goldsmith, Mrs. 
Goffe as his mother, " Frances Goldsmith." She was the daughter 
of Whalley, who was "Mr. Richardson." Rev. William Hooke 
was "D. G.," his wife, "Aunt Jane," was a sister to Whalley. 
It was in the Hooke family in London where the wife and children 
of Goffe found shelter. Circumstances brought about a change 
of residence. In the difficulty about Goffe's making a connection 
with the new address, evidence appears that Goffe was not in 
Hadley. 

As we all know the war brought desolation to the towns in the 
Connecticut Valley in the fall of 1675. In the spring of 1676 Mr. 
John Russell writes to the Bay a letter foreboding ill from the 
Indians, "We must look to feel their utmost rage. My desire is 
we may be willing to do or suffer, to live or die, remain in or be 
driven out as the Lord our God would have us." All ^signs 
pointed to trouble in the Valley, and for its protection Major 
Savage was sent with forces from Boston, with Samuel Nowell 
as chaplain; and Major Treat from Hartford, with John Whiting 
as chaplain. It is assumed that the hands of both chaplains 
will soon appear in the removal of Goffe, and notices of them 
will have a bearing on the evidence to be presented. Mr. Whiting 
was a leading man in Connecticut, and a minister of Hartford. 
His wife was Sybil, daughter of Edward Collins, an agent and 
correspondent of Goffe. His second wife was Phebe, daughter 
of Thomas Gregson, prominent at New Haven, a close friend of 



INTRODUCTION XXV 

Governor Eaton, and of John Davenport, while they were giving 
shelter to the Judges about New Haven. Mr. Whiting's daughter 
Abigail married Jonathan Russell, son of John of Hadley, and 
after the death of Mr. Whiting, the widow Phebe became the wife 
of John Russell. 

With no such close family relations, Chaplain Nowell was of 
old Puritan stock, and was in full sympathy with Goffe and Rus- 
sell. He never settled in the ministry, but held high office in the 
civil life of the colony, was intimate with clergymen including 
Increase Mather; was agent for the colony in England and often 
there. He was a man of action, was chaplain at the Great Swamp 
Fight Dec. 19, 1675, "where his bravery was much applauded," 
using, it is intimated, "other than spiritual weapons." When on 
the march from Boston to Hadley under Savage, March, 1676, he 
criticises the officers for being outwitted by Indian strategy and 
not making an effective onslaught on the enemy about Wenimesset. 
Again, on the returnmarch to Boston, MajorSavagehadconditional 
orders about striking the enemy in the swamps near the route. 
Arriving at Brookfield, a council of war was held to consider that 
question. The captains were opposed, while the intrepid Chap- 
lain Nowell voted for the attack. With the opening of spring, 
1676, the Indians made attacks on many of the outlying towns 
at the Bay. The authorities at Boston became much alarmed. 
The alarm soon grew to almost a panic. As Hubbard says, "It 
was now full Sea with Philip his Affairs." Orders were sent 
Major Savage to forthwith leave the valley to its fate, and march 
to the protection of the Bay. Only a forlorn hope was left with 
Captain William Turner. Hadley was no longer a safe retreat 
for GofFe. Who so likely as the impetuous Chaplain Nowell to 
take the risk of a night removal to Hartford, where Chaplain 
Whiting had prepared a place for his retreat. 

From letters at hand, extracts will be given which bear upon the 
question of Goffe's removal from Hadley. Inference may also 
be drawn as to the bodily and mental condition of GofFe. Sept. 
8, 1676, GofFe writes to Increase Mather: "Rever'd and Dear 
S r I have received the letters from England that you enclosed 
to M r Whiting and give you hearty thanks for your continued 
care in that matter. It is a great comfort to me to hear so fre- 
quently [from my] so far distant and dear relations, and I esteem 
it a great mercy, that (through your care) all our letters have 
hitherto passed without any one miscarrying. My dear Mo r [wife] 
writes that the last she received came safe tho' it wanted the 
outer covering they vsed to have. But she desired me to do so 



XXVI INTRODUCTION 

no more. ... I suppose their desire is that mine may be covered 
by yourselfe, as judging it most safe." This certainly indicates 
some change in location and mode of transmitting letters. In a 
second part of the same letter, GofFe writes, "I was greatly be- 
houlding to M r Noell for his assistance in my remove to this 
Town. I pray if he be yet in Boston, remember my affectionate 
respects to him." This could not refer to the removal to Hadley 
twelve years before. It must refer to Hartford as we shall see. 
Sept. 25, 1676, Samuel Nowell, our Chaplain, writes: "For 
his worthy friend M r Jonathan Bull of Hartford." The letter 
was evidently written for the eye of GofFe. Its spirit agrees with 
our estimate of the writer. "Hon d S r , — The day before the 
arrivall of this bearer, M r Bull, I had written a letter to my 
worthy friend M r Whyting & it was for your sake, in regard I 
did not know how to direct a few lines to you, & we have but little of 
news materiall stirring amongst us; there being no ship arrived 
lately from Engld. As for ourselves in New Engld, we are fearing 
a Generall Governour. How God will deale with us in our pres- 
ent buisinesse is uncertaine. I suppose you will judge it conven- 
ient to remove, if any such thing should happen, as that a Gov- 
ernour should be sent; although if this man live who is Governour 
at Boston [Governor Leverett], I believe the country will oppose, 
but if his head be once laid I do question whether he that shall 
come next will have spirit enough, or interest enough, to with- 
stand the Authority of Old Engld. I shall endeavour to give 
you as timely notice as I can from thence of whatsoever shall 
happen. I resolve to see your relations & so at present leave 
you under that Shaddow where you have been safe hithertoo. 
So desiring your prayers I rest, 

Y r very humble serv 1 , Samuel Nowell." 

It seems Nowell was going to England to watch the turn of 
affairs, and he would risk a visit to the family of GofFe. June 12, 
1677, GofFe writes Mather, "I have rec'd yours of 17^ May, 
with those from England, as also the 12th left with you by M N." 
— doubtless Mr. Nowell. There is no signature to this letter. 
While at Hadley, GofFe's address was "Walter Goldsmith." 
Aug. 30, 1678, he signs another letter to Mr. Mather "T. D." 
He writes: "I have received the letter you sent me very lately 
from my dear Mo: for which with all your long continued kind- 
nesse, I heartily thank you; and am really ashamed to think how 
I am forced to be still so troublesome vnto you." In his letter 
from his wife he learns that Mr. Hooke, with whom she was 



INTRODUCTION XXVII 

living, had died, and that she had removed to another place; 
but she forgot to name the new address, although she gave it to 
Mather. 

Oct. 23, 1678, GofFe writes Mather as "T. D." "I lately gave 
you the trouble of a letter with one enclosed to my dear Mother, 
which should have been sent to a Friend that was to have returned 
to this Town, by whom I hoped to have rec' d a few words from 
yo w . But he falling ill, went not. So I was forced to give an 
honor d friend, the trouble thereof, who saide he would deliver it 
with his own hand. ... I was forced to send that to my Mo: with 
a naked superscription and this also because I am ignorant of 
both the place & person appynted (since Mr. Hooke, his death) 
to direct them to. ... I should take it as a great kindnesse to 
receive a word or two from you, if you please to enclose it to M r 
Whiteing, only with this short direction (Thes for M r T. D.). . . . 
It would be a great satisfaction to heare that you have rec d my 
letters, and that you know the best way of sending them to Eng- 
land: & to be instructed by you, how to direct them for the future. 
Dear Sir, I desire to bear upon my Heart continually the many 
great concerns of this poor Countrey; especially of your Jurisdic- 
tion in reference to the many awfull providences wherewith the 
Lord hath been awakening you." This refers to the political 
turmoil at Boston, and also to the prevailing small-pox. 

April 2, 1679, GofFe writes Mather again concerning "The 
various dispensations of Providence"; hopes he and his wife will 
receive "all the sanctified fruite of all his dealings withyou. . . . And 
for your whole Jurisdiction. Oh that the Lord would help all 
his people there, to humble themselves vnder the mighty hand of 
God. . . . Then would he hear from heaven & forgive their sins 
& heale the land." No one in the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, 
would have written the above letters. GofFe was then in the juris- 
diction of Connecticut. The next direct evidence that the lone 
exile was in Hartford is found in a long letter to him from Peter 
Tilton, his old time Hadley friend. Extracts are given below. 
It is directed, probably under cover, to Mr. Whiting, "These 
for M r T. D. present." 

"July:3o:i679: Worthye and much honor d S r , — Yours which I 
cannot but mention, dated M ch . 18: '78: I receaved, crying howe 
wellcome and refreshing to my poore unworthye selfe, (which as 
an honey combe, to use your owne similitude full of pretious 
sweetenes). I would you did but knowe, being a semblance or 
representation of what sometime though unworthye, I had a 
Fuller Fruition of;" referring to their former intercourse at 



XXVIII INTRODUCTION 

Hadley. Tilton speaks of sending several books and papers, 
one of which he wants sent back — "it being borrowed, only, 
of a neighbour, I being desirous you might have a sight thereof. 
I have here sent you by S. P. [Samuel Porter of Hadley ?] tenn 
pounds haveing not before a safe hand to convey it, it being a token 
of the love and remembrance of severall friends who have you 
uppon their hearts." He speaks of the great news from England, 
"which I presume M r Russell hath given you a full account of, 
as understanding he hath written to Hartford, that I neede not 
tautologize in that matter." If Goffe were in Hadley, he might 
himself have borrowed the book, and Mr. Russell could have told 
him "the news from England " face to face. Tilton, however, goes 
on — "I know what is writt from England by good hands, which 
I have by me, viz. that the most sober and wisest there feare that 
Black Cloude hanging over the nation will breake uppon the 
Protestant Interest." After a page of saddening and gloomy items 
Tilton tries to give GofFe a gleam of encouragement in spite of 
the desponding information. "Deare Sir, I hope God is makeing 
way for your enlargement. In the meanetime my poore prayers 
for you are, the Lord would make your heart glad with the light 
of His Countenance, and that the Lord of Peace would give you 
peace allwayes and by all meanes; Remember before the Lord, 
your vnworthye Friend, willing to serve you. Vale, Vale. P. T." 
This tender benediction and farewell of good Mr. Tilton is 
literally the last word known to have been written to the misera- 
ble prisoner of fate. 

The act, with which the evidence of GofFe's residence at Hart- 
ford will close, has not to my knowledge been seriously con- 
sidered by any historian. It has, rather, been spoken of as 
a farce — a bit of foolery by a worthless scalawag. On the 
contrary, I am sure the event is real history, although hardly 
sober history, for certainly the farcical element largely prevails, 
and the fashion of the drama is seen where a terrible 
tragedy is followed by a comedy. The action of the story exactly 
fits the character of the prominent actors. None of these are 
amateurs. All have been before in the public eye. Governor 
Andros, the feared and hated; Governor Leete, the daring suc- 
cessful diplomat; Major Talcott, guest of John Russell; Secretary 
Allyn, the all-seeing; Captain Bull, the fearless and defiant; John 
London, the notorious and condemned liar. The stage is Hart- 
ford, the denouement June 10, 1680. The prophecy of Chaplain 
Nowell had come true — a "Generall Governour" of New Eng- 



INTRODUCTION XXIX 

land had been appointed, and the time had now arrived when 
Goffe did "find it convenient to remove." 

April 20, 1680, John London of Hartford or Windsor, made an 
affidavit at New York "that Capt. Joseph Bull, Sen: had for 
several years past kept privately at his own house in Hartford, 
Col. GofFe, who went by the name of Mr. Cooke; that the depo- 
nent and one Dr. Robert Howard of Windsor, saw said GofFe at 
Capt. Bull's house in May 1679; that the deponent took measures 
to seize him and carry him to New York, but that one Thomas 
Powell, his neighbour disclosed his plans to Major Talcott and 
Capt. Allyn, — who caused the deponent to be arrested, charged 
him with conspiring against the Colony and forbade him to leave 
the county without license." He says that "James Richards 
who was the oldest member of the Council and the richest man 
in the Colony, was Agent of GofFe and that if he, London, dis- 
covered the matter it would tend to his own ruin." At the date 
of this affidavit, Richards was probably on his deathbed, — he died 
June 10th. If so, London may now have considered himself safe in 
denouncing GofFe and claiming the reward. His movement the 
year before had terminated in a manner quite unexpected, and 
he considered Richards as the active agent. London was a worth- 
less fellow, who had been imprisoned for deserting, malicious 
lying against the Colony, etc., and it was easy to squelch him in 
his attempt to secure GofFe. The validity of his story now rests 
on the attending circumstances. Doctor Howard and Thomas 
Powell named in the affidavit were alive; they could dispute his 
story, and as well, Major Talcott, Captain Allyn and others. 
Furthermore, the actions of Governor Leete,Talcott, and Allyn con- 
firm the truth of the tale. On the strength of London's affidavit, 
Governor Andros wrote to Governor Leete and the Assistants: 

"Hon ble S"; 

Being informed by Deposicons here taken upon oath, that Coll. Goth 
hath been and is still kept and consealed by Capt. Joseph Bull and his 
sons in the Towne of Hartford und r the name of Mr. Cooke the s d Goth 
and Coll. Whaley (who is since dead in y or parts) haveing been persued 
as Traitors, that I may not be wanting in my duty, doe hereby give you 
the above intimacon, noe ways doubting of yo r loyalty in every respect, 
and remaine 

Hon ble S rs , Your affectionate neighbour and 
Humble Servant, 

E. Andross. 
New Yorke, 
May 18, 1680. 



XXX INTRODUCTION 

How fared this dispatch ? Hartford was one hundred miles 
away. A post riding express should have delivered it not later 
than noon on the 20th. The Colony records show that it was 
delivered to Leete June 10th, twenty-one days later. In whose 
pocket had it reposed for three weeks ? We can only be sure that 
the owner of it was high in office and a good friend of GofFe. 

An affair of this kind was no new experience to Governor Leete. 
When acting governor of New Haven Colony, in 1661, he had 
dealt successfully, as we have seen, with the loyal messengers, 
Kellond and Kirk. Time was evidently taken to make provision 
for GofFe. When the coast was clear, it so happened that on June 
loth, Governor Leete, Secretary Allyn, and Major Talcott, were 
together, when the letter from Andros was received, no doubt to 
their great surprise. However, they seem to have been so well 
prepared for it, that "before we parted" they were able to send 
forth a long patriotic and carefully constructed warrant, without 
one earmark of haste upon it, based as they say, upon "letter to 
us just now received" from Governor Andros. The constable 
and marshal were ordered in high-sounding verbiage to visit the 
Bull's and "search in the houses, barns, outhouses & all places 
therein, for the sayd Col. GofFe," or any other place where there 
is "the least susspition. Hereof you may not fayle, as you will 
answer the contrary at your perill." 

The next day a long letter was sent to Andros from Hartford 
thanking him for his notice, and telling him of their prompt action, 
" being togetherwhen we received your letter." Heisinformed that 
after the diligent search, the officers "being upon oath, returned," 
that they "could find no such person as was mentioned, nor any 
stranger that in the least could be suspected to be any such person." 
They then say, "After the search o r people were amased that 
any such thing could be suspected at Hartford, but the father of 
lyes is o r enemie & doth instigate his instruments to maligne this 
poore Colony, but we hope the Father of lights will vindicate vs 
in his due time." Andros is cautioned against believing all the 
flying stories against Connecticut, and told that if their men be- 
lieved all the stories against New York, it would breed bad blood 
between the Colonies. In every paper upon the subject the Gov- 
ernor and Assistants are careful to say that their action was instant 
upon receiving the letter, but we find no note of inquiry as 
to the tardy pace of the messenger; as though four and one-half 
miles a day was nothing uncommon for an express. There seems 
ho need of further evidence, that for several years General GofFe 
was at Hartford. 



INTRODUCTION XXXI 

The influences affecting Goffe's condition during the period are 
revealed in what follows. In the earlier years of exile, the Judges 
were sustained by the expectation of being speedily made free by 
the downfall of Charles II. They had constant news of the politi- 
cal movements in Europe, and as the years dragged on with Charles 
in the ascendency, hope gradually died out, as may be seen by 
their letters. One by one the members of the "High Court of 
Justice" were taken and executed with the barbarity of Cannibal 
Islanders, some of them after a surrender on fair but false prom- 
ises. Others were betrayed by fickle friends to curry favor with 
the Crown. Some were murdered in foreign lands. One cheering 
report came to their ears, that they themselves had been killed 
in Switzerland. Mrs. Goffe, with her children, had been safe 
with her Aunt Jane Hooke, at London. She had kept the absent 
husband in touch with all household events; the death of one child 
in her years of promise, the marriage of another, the birth and 
death of a grandchild; had shared with him her joys and sorrows. 

But a change was to come. Mr. Hooke fell sick and Aug. 5, 
1674, Goffe wrote him a farewell letter. It was long and tender 
as befitting the occasion; but as "that Heavy word is not yet 
spoken," he still has "Hope the Lord may lengthen out your 
life & mine & so order things in His Providence, that I may yet 
see your face once again, even in this world, which hath indeed, 
nothing in it more Desirable than such faces." He deplores the 
necessity of his wife's removal, but hopes "the Lord who tells all 
her wanderings and puts her tears into his bottle . . . will provide 
some place where she may comfortably abide . . . and bless her 
& her poor afflicted family." It was soon after this that trouble 
began about their correspondence. Goffe was never able to find 
out the place of her abode. Goffe writes to Mather June 12, 1677, 
"I have rec d yours of the 17th of May, with those from England, 
as also the 12th left with you by M. N., for all which &: for all 
former kindnesses, I return you my hearty thanks, which is all 
I am able to do. . . . Dear S r , You know my tryalls are considera- 
ble, & did you know my weakness, you would surely pitty & pray 
earnestly for me." He hopes the Lord's purpose is to teach him 
a "Lesson by bringing & keeping me into this Desolate state." 
He finds in the Scriptures, "Good & comfortable words from the 
Lord, or any of his people are very refreshing. But alas, I am 
worthy of neither." Alas, indeed, that these longed-for words are 
so few. He misses Whalley, and at Hartford his horizon is more 
and more obscure. In another letter to Mather he writes, "Dear 
Sir, I Beg the continuance of your Love & fervent prayers, that 



XXXII INTRODUCTION 

for the gpod will of him that Dwelt in the Bush, the Blessing may 
yet come upon the head, the top of the head of the poor worm 
that hath been so long seperated from his brethern and allmost 
from all Humain Society." 

After Mrs. Goffe's removal from the Hooke house, a new chan- 
nel for correspondence became necessary. GofFe as "T. D." 
writes in a letter to Mather, Aug. 30, 1678, that as regards Mr. 
Hooke, "that Heavy word has been spoken." He says "My 
Mo: writes that he being dead shee hath written to her Friend (by 
whom I suppose she means yourself) to send her letters to another 
place; but did so far forget herself, as not to inform me either of 
name or place." He encloses a letter to his wife, "which I hum- 
bly entreat you to cover and send away, . . and also that you 
would be pleased to give yourself the trouble of writeing a few 
words to let me know what place & person it is, that my Dear 
Mo: directs to, that I may know for the future how to superscribe 
my letter to her." 

To this reasonable appeal no reply was ever received, and no 
better heed was given later ones. "T. D." writes again Oct. 
23, 1678, "I lately gave you the trouble of a letter, with one 
enclosed to my Dear Mother . . . and hoped to have rec d a few 
words from y w . . . . I was forced to send that to my Mo : with a 
naked superscription and this also; because I am ignorant both 
of the place & person appoynted (since Mr. H. his death) to direct 
them to. I beseech you sir, to vse your prudenc in the safe con- 
vayance of them, for tho' my letters be of little worth, yet my Dear 
Mo: is pleased to esteem them a comfort to her in this day of her 
great and long continued affliction. ... I should take it as a great 
kindnesse to receive a word or two from you, if you please to 
inclose it to M r Whiteing. . . It would be a great satisfaction to 
heare that you have rec d my letters, and that you know the way 
of sending them to England, & to be instructed by you, how to 

direct them for the future I Beg your fervent prayers, as 

having more need of them than ever. I have been long in the 
furnace." 

April 2, 1679, the anxious and tortured T. D. makes another 
and last appeal to Mather — "I am also greatly longing to heare 
from my poor, Desolat Relations; and whether my last summer's 
letters got safe to them. It was a trouble to me that I was forced 
to send them to yourself so badly directed, and hoped to have 
received a few lines from you concerning it, and how you would 
have me direct them for the future. I Beseech you S r to pardon my 
giving you this great & long trouble, and let me receive a word or 



INTRODUCTION XXXIII 

two by this Bearer. If I have missed it in anything, vpon the 
least intimation, I shall indeavour to rectify it, or reform for the 
future. Dear Sir, I earnestly Beg the continuance of your fervant 
prayers to the Lord for me & mine, as such as stand in great need 
thereof. I may truly say, I make mention of yourself in particular, 
at least twise or thise in a day before the Lord to whose Grace I 
recomend you & all yours, and remain, Dear Sir, your much 
oblidged and very thankfull friend, T. D. 

I sent you three letters last summer & hope you received them." 

How could the sorrowing husband and father account for the 
seemingly coldhearted refusal of Mather to heed his earnest 
supplications ? How can we explain it ? The keen hunt for 
Goffe was still on. It may be that Mather had heard or suspected 
that the Bull family at Hartford were more defiant than circum- 
spect in regard to "Mr. Cooke," and he feared to trust his signa- 
ture or the secret with them. The last words known to have been 
written by the sad exile are those which close the above letter, 
hoping that his letters to Mather had been received. With no 
assurance that this hope was well founded, without knowing that 
his desolate wife had received a single word from him after her 
removal; repulsed in all attempts to learn even the place of her 
abode; with his narrowing circle of faithful friends in England 
and New England; unable to account for the cutting coldness 
and neglect of the one who was the sole connecting link with his 
native land; helpless to offer comfort to his far-ofF wife in her 
loneliness; feeling that he should never more see the faces of 
wife and children, although he felt and had said, "This world 
hath indeed nothing in it more Desirable than such faces"; with 
a growing realization or fear of being a heavy, and perhaps un- 
welcome burden; the proud spirit of the old soldier humbled and 
humiliated in a vain attempt to win even the pity of Mather; 
with a price set upon his head and an ever-haunting fear of dis- 
covery, bringing ruin to his protectors. Was it not indeed time 
to die! and we seem to see the once lion heart of the hunted exile 
slowly breaking. 

General Goffe had played his high part before the eyes of 
watching nations. He had been a star of the first magnitude in 
the Lord Protector Cromwell's Councils, and acquitted himself 
bravely and well, as one having the courage of his convictions. 
Words fail to tell of the sadness and pathos of such a close to 
such a life. 

Did Goffe return to die in Hadley ? Shall we attempt to follow 
the fugitive from Hartford in 1680? No blazed path is found, 



XXXIV INTRODUCTION 

but we do find a faint trail leading back to Hadley. What little 
evidence there is points that way. Nothing is found opposing, 
but the case is not proven. So far as we know there had been 
no leak in the secret of Mr. Russell. GofFe had been driven away 
in the stress of war. It would still be a safe retreat and to all 
appearances a natural one. The diary of GofFe and his papers, 
including the letters written to him at Hartford by Tilton and 
Nowell given above, are found among the effects left by Mr. 
John Russell. How did they get there ? Would they not have 
been destroyed as a matter of precaution, had GofFe died else- 
where ? Again, we have the untainted tradition found by Hutch- 
inson at Hadley in 1763, "Two persons unknown were buried 
in the minister's cellar." It was the sum of all knowledge of the 
Judges, which Hutchinson could obtain in Hadley, or the vicinity; 
let that stand for what it is worth. Then there is the general 
probability, that after getting the consent of Mr. Russell he was 
transported back to Hadley; there was time enough for this 
between the opening act and the closing of the Hartford drama. 
It is pleasant, and is it not best, to follow these leadings 
and our wishes so far as to think that the worn wanderer came 
back to breathe out his life on the bosom of faithful John Russell; 
and that he rested at last beside his companion in exile, under the 
sheltering elms of Old Hadley. 



WHALLEY AND GOFFE 
IN NEW ENGLAND 



1660-1680 



An Enquiry into the Origin op 

the Angel of Hadley 

Legend 



By GEORGE SHELDON 



reprinted from the introduction to the new edition of 
Judd's History of Hadley 

BY 

H. R. Huntting & Co., Springfield, Mass. 
1905 



3 

s 



